Invest in your success.
JVRA helps lawyers win cases by providing critical information you can use to establish precedent, determine demand and win arguments.
ARTICLE ID 26880
$________ - INCLUDING $________ IN PUNITIVEDAMAGES - BREACH OF CONTRACT BY CIGAR MANUFACTURER - FRAUD - TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH CONTRACT - VIOLATION OF UNIFORM TRADE SECRETS ACT - ALLEGED THEFT OF CUSTOMER LISTS - LOSS OF BUSINESS PROFITS - MOLDED JUDGMENT OF $________.
Miami-Dade County
The plaintiff in this action was a national cigar distributor who
claimed that the defendant cigar manufacturer and its affiliates stole
its customer lists, fraudulently misrepresented its business relationship
and caused it to lose significant business profits. The defendants
maintained that the customer list at issue was not secret and was
given to them. The defendants also denied selling cigars to the plaintiffs
customers and contended that no promises were made to the plaintiff
concerning continuation of its distributorship.
In ________, the plaintiff was a distributor in 49 states for cigars made
by the defendant U.S. Cigar Sales, Inc., an affiliate of the defendant
UST Inc. The plaintiff claimed that it was given assurances that it
would continue its distribution rights for an additional three years.
However, the plaintiff alleged that the defendants conspired to exclude
it from the cigar business and set up their own distributorship.
The plaintiff claimed that the defendants stole its customer list
and filled orders which were placed by its customers. The plaintiff
sought damages for loss of business profits, theft of its customer
list and punitive damages.
The defendants denied that there was any breach of the distribution
contract between the plaintiff and U.S. Cigar Sales, Inc. The defendants
denied that they filled any orders which were placed with the plaintiff.
The defense maintained that the customer list at issue was not secret
and was freely given to it by the plaintiff. The defendants also denied
that the plaintiff was promised distribution rights for an additional
three years and argued that no representations were made to the plaintiff
concerning its future business relationship with the defendants.
The defendants also argued that the damages claimed by the plaintiff
were speculative and nonexistent.
The jury found that the defendant UST Inc., was not liable on any
of the plaintiffs claims. The jury found for the plaintiff in the
total amount of $________ against the remaining defendants. The
award included damages for breach of the distribution agreement, tortious
interference with business relationships, fraud and violation of the
Uniform Trade Secrets Act. The award also included a total of $________
in punitive damages. In a series of posttrial rulings, the court determined
that certain portions of the verdict were duplicative and certain
other portions were defective as a matter of law. In addition, the
court reduced the plaintiffs compensatory award by a setoff. The
total amount of compensatory damages awarded by the courts final
judgment of August 30, ________ was $________, including prejudgment
interest. The court awarded $________ in punitive damages and $________
in costs, yielding a total judgment for the plaintiff in the amount
of $________.
5 ways to win with JVRA
JVRA gives you jurisdiction-specific, year-round insight into the strategies, arguments and tactics that win. Successful attorneys come to the table prepared and use JVRA to:
- Determine if a case is winnable and recovery amounts.
- Determine reasonable demand for a case early on.
- Support a settlement demand by establishing precedent.
- Research trial strategies, tactics and arguments.
- Defeat or support post-trial motions through past case histories.
Try JVRA for a day or a month, or sign up for our deluxe Litigation Support Plan and put the intelligence of JVRA to work for all of your clients. See our subscription plans.